Isn't TOR a bit too slow to watch videos in YouTube?
I've been getting a "You must sign on to see this content" from YouTube (refusing to play the video if I don't) for ages when I'm behind a VPN, but if I disconnect the VPN and try again I don't get it.
Curiously, sometimes it doesn't happen.
I guess YouTube has a list of IP addresses of VPN exit points and will do that if it detects a connection coming from one of those, but at least for my VPN provider some exit points are not in the list.
I read it as the idiots being the majority of American, both the voters who voted for them and the ones who over the years kept voting for people who were plowing, fertilizing and sowing the field where something like Trumpist would grow (you know, undermining Rule Of Law, helping the few pillage the things of the many, completely destroying social mobility in America and so on).
Trump's a clown but he's not stupid (not especially smart, either, but still smart enough to say whatever it takes and play that dumb-person's-idead-of-a-smart-person character to manipulate simpletons) and his handlers are most definitely not stupid.
I heard on TV your muppet VP say something about "300 thousand Americans dead from drugs a year" to justify this shit and one word immediately came to my mind:
- Oxycodone
The actions of this American Administration have nothing at all to do with protecting the potential victims of drugs.
I think a more subtle point is that even by the most Business-oriented, cold, calculating, empathy-devoid, mathematical take possible were humans are nothing more than wealth generating cogs, the system is still shit because it's not using said cogs in the most optimal way (which requires the "cogs" to be healthy and at least somewhat content with life).
In other words, even by the criteria of the hardest of hard Right, the system we have is shit because the over-exploitation of those they see as wealth producing peons and sub-optimal allocation of resources for necessary auxiliary social system means the entire system is producing less wealth than it could if said "wealth producing peons" were kept in better shape and more content.
Yeah, that's the sketch that always comes to my mind when it comes to people in positions of authority and computers.
"Computer says" is enough confirmation for most people.
If you're going for it, why only go half way?
The Proud Boys should be renamed "Storm troopers", and be dressed in brown shirts and knee-high leather boots, whilst immigrants should be mandated by law to wear yellow David Stars in a highly visible place on their chest.
Fair enough: as per one of its dictionary definitions "Evidence" is "The means by which an allegation may be proven, such as oral testimony, documents, or physical objects" so that photo can be said to be "evidence", just like the woman's words can be said to be "evidence", just like anything at all no matter how flimsy which any side claims or implies that "may prove the allegation".
My bad, "evidence" is not "proof" (which was how I read it) and you never claimed it was "proof", so my mistake.
So strictly speaking your statement was correct, even whilst not actually countering the point of the poster you were responding to: they claimed that there was no "credible evidence" whilst you pointed out (correctly as you just showed me) that there was "evidence", which is not the same as "credible evidence".
I'll try henceforth to keep in mind that saying that "there is evidence" means absolutelly nothing at all about a case beyond somebody having claimed that something they provided may prove an allegation on that case (in other words, claiming something is "evidence" is an allegation about an allegation, so that by itself doesn't prove or disprove anything further than the initial allegation by itself).
I would say that our discussing here shows that at the original point to which you replied to still stands: the US Administration has shown no credible evidence. They've provided what they claim is "evidence", but then again a Trump recording saying "it's true" could also be claimed to be "evidence" per the dictionary definition of the word.
They're your fucking elected representatives, not the fucking king - they're supposed to work for you not "act in their own best interests" and you sure as hell have a fucking D U T Y to blame them for breaking their legal, ethical and moral duty to use the power entrusted to them by Americans in the interest of Americans, not for themselves.
God damn, fucking American bootlicking brainwashed muppets looking up to "their betters" even harder than the equivalent sort on this side of the Atlantic. At least we Europeans have a fucking good excuse for all those "looking up to your betters" muppets, having had Monarchies for most of the last 2 thousand years which only ended in the late 19th and early 20th century, whilst Americans have had a supposedly "of the people for the people" democracy since the 18th century.
No wonder the US is even more fucked up than Europe with all the instinctive pulling down of their pants and shouting "give it to me more, big daddy" (and not even in a good, kinky way) whenever some POLITICAL CELEBRITY who is supposed to be an elected representative does whatever is in their own best interest.
No, no, no.
The "evidence" for the "crimes" committed by those on the boat having been either incinerated or blown into a million tiny pieces and sunken to the bottom of the ocean is just an "unfortunate" side-effect.
The correct reaction against a bully (especially one who, again and again, uses the very same threats that got him compliance before and only ever those) is exactly to double down on the thing the bully does not want.